Habib Bank Limited‟s webpages boast that banking can be conducted anywhere in the world. (See Exhibits 5 and 6 to 28 U.S.C. §1746 Statement of Frederick A. Lovejoy) Similarly, Judge Scheindlin in Monies v. Commercial Bank of Kuwait, S.A.K., 399 F.Supp. 2d 310, 315-316 (S.D.N.Y. 2005) (rev‟d on other grounds, 204 Fed. Appx. 988 (2d Cir. 2006)) held that “[t]he law seems fairly well-settled that the domestic branch of a foreign bank is not a separate legal entity under either New York or federal law.” Quoting Greenbaum v. Handelsbanken NY, 26 F.Supp. 2d 649, 652-53 (S.D.N.Y. 1998).

The statements and matters alleged herein are within my personal knowledge, and true and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief, except as to those allegations stated upon information and belief, and, as to those allegations, I believe them to be true. Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1746, I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct. Date: __March 30, 2017________ _____________________ Michael Shipley Case 2:16-cv-01019-DGC Document 63 Filed 04/01/17 Page 41 of 45 Case 2:16-cv-01019-DGC Document 63 Filed 04/01/17 Page 42 of 45 Case 2:16-cv-01019-DGC Document 63 Filed 04/01/17 Page 43 of 45 Case 2:16-cv-01019-DGC Document 63 Filed 04/01/17 Page 44 of 45 Case 2:16-cv-01019-DGC Document 63 Filed 04/01/17 Page 45 of 45

1 3 Exhibit C). Accordingly, as Plaintiff’s and Mr. Sporidis’s declarations are not notarized and do not recite the language required to comply with 28 U.S.C. § 1746, they cannot be considered valid for purposes of the Opposition Brief. B. A Majority of Witnesses Expected to Testify Reside in Georgia.

Although satisfying the requirements of 28 U.S.C. § 1746 is simple enough, Dann’s and Neville’s unsworn Declaration is not executed as “true under penalty of perjury.” This is the second Declaration of Dann and Neville that fails to comply with the requirements of 28 U.S.C. § 1746. For good cause shown, the Court should strike Dann’s and Neville’s Declaration in its entirety.

(emphasis added)). 14 Declaration Under Penalty of Perjury Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1746 of Chris Griffin, attached hereto as Exhibit “1,” ¶ 9. 15 Id.

. Moreover, Mr. Wiley’s declaration does not include a statement that is identical to or substantially similar to the exemplary clause of 28 U.S.C. § 1746. See In re Muscatell, 106 B.R. 307, 309 (Bankr. M.D. Fla. 1989) (“28 U.S.C. § 1746 does not mandate strict compliance with the exemplary clause provided in the statute [however] the statute clearly states the clause needs to be in substantially the same form as the one in the statute.”)

See Duffy v. Leading Edge Prods., Inc., 44 F.3d 308, 312 (5th Cir. 1995); Quest Exploration and Development Co. v. Transco Energy Co., 24 F.3d 738, 742 (5th Cir. 1994) (affirming summary judgment because nonmovant advanced unsupported affidavit evidence and stating that “unsubstantiated assertions are simply not competent summary judgment evidence”). Case 2:17-cv-06003-JVM Document 72 Filed 01/24/19 Page 3 of 6 4 Accordingly, Plaintiff’s Opposition fails to show how the Affidavit of Jaleana Stevenson meets the requirements of Rule 56 or 28 U.S.C. § 1746. See Pan-Islamic Trade Corp. v. Exxon Corp., 632 F.2d 539, 556 (5th Cir. 1980) (holding affidavit that did not set forth facts admissible in evidence was entitled to no weight when deciding summary judgment).

s/Herschel E. Richard, Jr. OF COUNSEL Case 5:16-cv-00850-SMH-KLH Document 43-3 Filed 02/10/17 Page 10 of 10 PageID #: 872 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA SHREVEPORT DIVISION WIENER, WEISS & MADISON, A PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION, AND KANTROW, SPAHT, WEAVER & BLITZER (A PROFESSIONAL LAW CORPORATION) CIVIL ACTION NO. 16:850 VERSUS JUDGE HICKS LESLIE B. FOX MAGISTRATE JUDGE HAYES DECLARATION PURSUANT TO 28 U.S.C. § 1746 I, R. JOSEPH NAUS, do hereby declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct and based on my personal knowledge, information, and belief: (1) Leslie B. Fox (“Fox”) is the former wife of Harold L. Rosbottom, Jr. (“Rosbottom”). (2) In 2009, Fox retained Wiener, Weiss & Madison, A Professional Law Corporation, and Kantrow, Spaht, Weaver & Blitzer (A Professional Law Corporation)(collectively, the “Firms”) to represent her interests in two related bankruptcy proceedings, viz.: (a) a chapter 11 bankruptcy filed by Rosbottom, see In re Harold L. Rosbottom, Jr., No. 09-BR-11674 (W.D. La. filed June 9, 2009) (“BR Docket No. 09-11674”); and (b) a chapter 11 bankruptcy proceeding filed by Caddo- Bossier Gaming Company, LLC (an entity owned by Fox and Rosbottom), see In re Caddo-Bossier Gaming Company, LLC, No. 09-BR-11673 (W.D. La. filed June 9, 2009); (collectively, the “Bankruptcy Proceedings”).

Under 28 U.S.C. 7687, I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct. I declare under the penalty of perjury and in lieu of an affidavit as permitted by 28 U.S.C. § 1746 that the foregoing is true and correct. Executed on: January 23, 2017 ___/s/ James T. Hunt, Jr.______ James T. Hunt, Jr.

1 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA ATLANTA DIVISION __________________________________ ROBERT N. GREENBERGER, ) ) Plaintiff ) ) v. ) No. 1:15-CV-3710-AT ) INTERNAL REVENUE SERVICE, ) ) Defendant. ) ) DECLARATION OF DEBORAH FITZPATRICK I, Deborah Fitzpatrick, pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 1746, declare as follows: 1. I am a Revenue Agent Group Manager with Examination within Small Business Self Employed (SBSE) of the Internal Revenue Service (IRS or Service).